when I applied for any job I knew of the working conditions. If I didn't like the conditions I didn't take the job. I always thought the employee was to adapt to the job, not the job adapting to the employee. After all that's why your getting paid!.......LIFT THE BAN...LET FREEDOM RING......

AS USUAL BACKERS OF A BAD PROPOSAL USE WHATEVER FACTORS THEY MAY LIKE TO MAKE THEIR POINT. OBVIOUSLY THE CURRENT ECONOMY WHICH HAS HIT RESTAURANT AND SALOON OWNERS EQUALLY IS FALL OUT OF CURRENT ECONOMY. TO ASSIGN THOSE LOSSES TO SMOKING BAN IS LUDICROUS. SUPPORTING SMOKING WRONG THINKING. I AM SURE THOSE SAME OWNERS DON'T LIKE PAYING HEALTH POLICIES COSTS OF WHICH MANY ARE DUE TO CONSEQUENCES OF SMOKING AND SECOND HAND SMOKE.

This ban creates a form of condemnation without proper do process. This law creates a loss in revenue for many establishments and they should be compensated in the form of lower tax values as their property now has restrictions attached to it. If you lower my value, then it should be compensated by lowering my taxes both real estate and income. Farmers receive compensation when the government restricts what or how much they can plant of a certain commodity, then they better pony up to the treasurer's office and make good. This is just another example of the bureaucrats being influenced by special interest groups via PAC dollars or should we say "legalized Bribery". This law should be unconstitutional based on the fact the Casinos do not have to participate due to business reasons. Business is business no matter what nationality or classification it may fall in.

As a young professional, the fact that the smoking ban was part of state law was a, albeit small, factor that helped in convincing me to move back to MI. If the ban get overturned, I suspect that many young, educated professionals will look elsewhere if given the choice. I understand that the small bar owners are struggling, but I sometimes wonder if that has as much to do with the economic situation as it does the smoking ban.